As a self-described Reagan Republican, I humbly suggest that Brown ought to take a page from Ronald's playbook. Under Reagan's first term as president, he increased the role of government by 12% (some of this through the 17 tax hikes he helped implement). In contrast, the penny-pinching Obama has presided over a negative 1% government growth rate. If Brown and Obama were able to spend like Reagan, California and the nation would be doing much better now. Please, please, please don't respond by telling me that Ronald Reagan was a liberal, Marxist, big government advocate. Okay, compared to the GOP's candidates and members of congress, maybe he seems like a liberal, Marxist, big government advocate. But times have changed. See Greece's failed effort to implement government austerity measures.

Posted by radical
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Mar 14, 2012 at 10:40 am

i am sure that Rose can cite statistics backing the claim that "the penny-pinching Obama has presided over a negative 1% government growth rate".

the comparison with Reagan is invalid, plainly. When Ronald Reagan took office the US economy had 9% inflation with 20% interest rates. The economic policies known as reaganomics included the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981, which included the largest tax cuts in the postwar period, the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982, and the Tax Reform Act of 1986. As a result, the top marginal tax rate on individual income was reduced from 70% to 28% and the overall tax code was restructured.
--of course Obama entered office with low tax rates in effect, thanks to President Bush, and the Republican House has battled Pelosi, Reid and Obama to maintain these low tax rates

Oh yeah, by the way, Reagan worked WITH an opposition controlled house of representatives to accomplish these things.

Results? policies resulted in the largest peacetime economic boom in American history and nearly 35 million more jobs. As the Joint Economic Committee reported in April 2000:2

In 1981, newly elected President Ronald Reagan refocused fiscal policy on the long run. He proposed, and Congress passed, sharp cuts in marginal tax rates. The cuts increased incentives to work and stimulated growth. These were fundamental policy changes that provided the foundation for the Great Expansion that began in December 1982. The United States has experienced two of the longest and strongest expansions in our history back to back. They were interrupted only by a shallow eight-month downturn in 1990-91.
and unemployment was at a 14-year low, 5.5%, by mid-1988. On Jan. 20, 1989, Ronald Reagan left the White House with the highest approval rating, 68%, of any president since Franklin D. Roosevelt.

much of the increase in spending went to defense, which helped to bring about the end of the soviet union, permanently increasing democracy and freedom around the world, most especially in eastern europe, which has since experienced economic revitalization, and notice the current economic troubles of the EU have not greatly affected any of the former soviet bloc.

cut the budgets of many federal departments, including the Department of Housing and Urban Development (by 40%), the Department of Transportation (by 18%), the Department of Education (by 19%), the Department of Commerce (by 32%), and the Department of Agriculture (by 24%). Reagan never cut the budgets for the Departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, Justice, or State. [4]

President Reagan also presided over the biggest peacetime defense buildup in history. Reagan expanded defense spending from $178 billion in 1981 to $283 billion by 1988, an increase of 58.9%.

Dan says, "there are still some who's solution is to heap yet MORE taxes and fee's on us." Whose solution? Exactly, Dan! And what fees? Ditto, Dan. I can see we should try to emulate the standards of the state that gave Dan his education.

Paul, were goin ta miss ya pardner! You"ll have a big choice of Walmarts down there ta choose from!

Posted by jimf01
a resident of another community
on Mar 15, 2012 at 11:34 amjimf01 is a registered user.

California is suffering from a stunning drop in tax revenues this year. You see media reports that we are seeing signs of an economic recovery for this state, but no mass media outlet is reporting that tax revenues for Feb 2012 are 22% lower year over year.

In addition to teaching better grammar in Arkansas, Dan's home state, the Walmart-chickenfarm state has so much more to offer than California.

Lower taxes to be sure! But like I tell my son who's in high school right now. "Son, don't even think about any of the UC's, or Stanford, or Cal Tech. No way, Jose! Go to the University of Arkansas!" Far better university than any of the posers above!

Lower taxes to be sure. But like I also tell my son, "Since you're thinking about a technology degree, avoid the Silicon Valley like the plague. Everybody in the world would rather find employment in Arkansas."

Yup, California is just such a terrible place to live. That's why so many of the Silicon Valley firms have moved to Little Rock, Slippery Rock, and other freedom-loving places.

According to Gov. Rick Perry, Apple plans to drop $304 million into a new campus in Austin. The new facility, the governor's office said Friday, will create over 3,600 jobs in the state over the next decade and double the size of Apple's workforce across Texas. The state didn't divulge too many details but did say the facility will be used to expand "customer support, sales, and accounting functions."

. . . .

To help sweeten the pot for its latest deal, Apple was given $21 million from the Texas Enterprise Fund. The fund, which is used to close deals that bring companies to the state, has awarded over $443.4 million to firms since its inception in 2003. Perry's office claims these companies have created over 62,000 new jobs and more than $15.4 billion in capital